spinbadz own

The New York Times' all-star squadron of left-wing columnists took a hammering following their recent spate of "Yay, the war is over and we lost" offerings.

Now we are entertained by appalling responses from comrades Rich & Dowd.

From Ms. Dowd (August 20) come hints, barely disguised, at yet another kindergarten-concocted conspiracy theory targetting her mythological nemeses.

Following the prescription of the devil incarnate Richard Nixon, Dowd intimates, the Texan bubble-boy on a bicycle may now aim to extend the Iraq campaign. For the purpose, she whispers, of securing Republican victory in the next election.

We can deduct that Islamissile suicide-murderers in Iraq may therefore be complicit in this new conspiracy, just as Taliban-trained Saudis sacrificed themselves for secret leader W in the last big conspiracy on 2001/9/11.

We can also deduct, of course, that a formation of pigs flies in permanent salute to journalistic license outside Pulitzer Dowd's office window in the Grayladystan tower building.

Rich also remains in drugged thrall to that formation.

The funniest part of his Aug 21 rant may be the unintended irony of the claim that "(c)haracter assassination is the Karl Rove tactic of choice, eagerly mimicked by his media surrogates".

This in the middle of yet another viscious Bush character assassination, even while shamelessly and repeatedly echoing the language of assaults on the President by other liberal "media surrogates".

Yet the most revealing part in the piece is the flailing crescendo at its end:

"The 24/7 cable and Web attack dogs can keep on sliming Cindy Sheehan...But this White House no longer has any more control over the insurgency at home than it does over the one in Iraq."

Insurgency indeed.

Here Rich admits, as if the admission is needed, to empathy and unity of purpose between the American-killers in Iraq and the anti-Bush machine at home. Or to treason, as interpreted in many parts of the world throughout much of recorded history.

Rich also concedes that his own and his comrades' effectiveness in floating the latest anti-Bush balloon - this one grandly and hypocritically sub-titled "The Dead American Soldier", with a Cindy Sheehan icon stamped upon it - is being blunted and beaten all over the information superhighway.

Perhaps he has finally had a surf beyond MoveOn and TheOnion.

Last week he seemed to be gloating about Sheehan domination of the blogosphere. This week he may have finally started to smell the coffee.

To Rich's ultimate employers, the businessmen-owners, the media realities are only too well-known.

More and more people surf the net for news, as you and I know too well. Newspaper circulations in traditional markets everywhere are down. Network news reach diminishes faster than oil supplies.

Fox rules US cable, and CNN continues to play the angry dog yapping at the ever-more-distant heels of its competitor.

There was a time, not long ago, that when the Gray Lady said jump, sister media said how high. That seems to be the world Frank Rich imagines he still lives in.

However, these days NYT biases and inanities may be publicly torn to shreds within minutes. The paper's leanings are widely assumed and derided.

Look at the tone of an otherwise quite innocuous Internet offering - on a completely different subject - from James Glassman of the American Enterprise Institute 2 days ago:

The New York Times could barely contain its delight. The economy is slowing down because of soaring energy costs!

"The pain that now seems imminent might have been avoided," said a Times sermonette (sic). "Conservation could have reduced energy demand and prices ... "

Glassman proceeded to rip that notion apart.

No doubt he always had the ability to write this kind of opinion, but in previous days few may have had the chance to read it.

Now he can publish on the AEI site itself and be syndicated all over the Net. Softly-softly crawling and begging to the NYT is no longer one of the sine qua nons of broad public access.

Big media still controls the pumps that can launch the really big balloons, but once those balloons are floated they become targets liable to death by a million pricks.

As we are, or may be, seeing with Cindy Sheehan.

Sure, the Sheehan float has been stuffed lots of Hollywood bells and whistles, but what does it say when Joan Baez is wheeled out for oomph, The Stones and Streisand for message, and the usual suspects for backing and promotion?

Do you nod in agreement or roll your eyes when Frank and Mo complain about the "sliming" neo-con opposition? Do you laugh at or accept their word that your loafing elected leader is icily sacrificing troops at the altar of a "re-election" that won't involve him?

The responses to such questions are more nuanced these days than they might have been previously. Sheehan is hardly the political steamroller she might have been when the New York Times ruled the fourth estate.